I know there are differences between my filtered version and the 1.2 but what a lot of people have said about the 1.2 these are similar in some aspects. The highs i think suffer a fair bit and are really subdued and taken back a bit. The bass has changed it to something else though and gained in quantity and sub-bass extension by quite a fair bit while retaining there already superb tightness and quality.

However the biggest change is in the mids. They have changed massive and i have to say they do not have the same appeal but i see why people prefer it and as it is consumer friendly and non-fatiguing. However it is not quite as clear and revealing with less detail. It is also warmer ever so slightly from the increased mid-bass. The biggest difference is its texture and it is know a lot more fluid and thick.

I prefer the original sound at the moment but this is more fun and easier to listen to with and female vocals have become a real pleasure.

I think though i have the best of both the 1.1 and some of the 1.2 with these filters and i am going to enjoy the two signatures they offer. I also will feel a lot more comfortable recommending the ASG again!

Slap a good quality, silver cable on the 1.2 (or find the proper impedance at which they even out & add resistors). A silver cable on my 1.2 improves treble presence, thinned out and improved clarity through the midrange, and tightened the midbass. It sounded crisper and more refined to my ears. not night and day.. but distinguishable, nonetheless. I had sold my 1.2 before my silver cable came back.. and kind of regretted it.

I know there are slight differences between my filtered version and the 1.2 but what a lot of people have said about the 1.2 these are seemingly identical. The highs i think suffer a fair bit and are really subdued and taken back a bit. The bass has changed it to something else though and gained in quantity and sub-bass extension by quite a fair bit while retaining there already superb tightness and quality.

However the biggest change is in the mids. They have changed massive and i have to say they do not have the same appeal but i see why people prefer it and as it is consumer friendly and non-fatiguing. However it is not quite as clear and revealing with less detail. It is also warmer ever so slightly from the increased mid-bass. The biggest difference is its texture and it is know a lot more fluid and thick.

I prefer the original sound at the moment but this is more fun and easier to listen to with and female vocals have become a real pleasure.

I think though i have the best of both the 1.1 and 1.2 with these filters and i am going to enjoy the two signatures they offer. I also will feel a lot more comfortable recommending the ASG again!

(These are all after little listening and opinions may change.)

The filter alone will not accomplish what is needed for rev 1.2. The actual porting on the inside of the IEM was increased in size, there is dampening material all around the driver, and the filters are cut to a specific length. The filters won't even do it justice.

The filter alone will not accomplish what is needed for rev 1.2. The actual porting on the inside of the IEM was increased in size, there is dampening material all around the driver, and the filters are cut to a specific length. The filters won't even do it justice.

I know all this and only said that i have got closer to the sound and what i hear sounds very similar to how you described just not quite as good. I have different lengths of filters and need some time to play around but should be good fun!

I know there are slight differences between my filtered version and the 1.2 but what a lot of people have said about the 1.2 these are seemingly identical. The highs i think suffer a fair bit and are really subdued and taken back a bit.

It sounds like your modification is different than the ASG-1 ver 1.2.

I would say that the treble in the ASG-1 ver 1.2 doesn't suffer and aren't really taken back at all compared to the ASG-1 original. To be clear, I'm saying that the treble is what it is and the ver 1.2 filter doesn't really take from that.

I had actually talked to Dale about this. He said the treble is actually slightly more prominent in relation to the now filtered mids for the ver 1.2.

Why don't you listen to an ASG-1 ver 1.2 when you get the chance, and then compare it to yours? While it sounds as though your modification may dampen above the range that the ASG-1 ver 1.2 does, it's hard to say until someone can hear both.

I would say that the treble in the ASG-1 ver 1.2 doesn't suffer and aren't really taken back at all compared to the ASG-1 original. To be clear, I'm saying that the treble is what it is and the ver 1.2 filter doesn't really take from that.

I had actually talked to Dale about this. He said the treble is actually slightly more prominent in relation to the now filtered mids for the ver 1.2.

Why don't you listen to an ASG-1 ver 1.2 when you get the chance, and then compare it to yours? While it sounds as though your modification may dampen above the range that the ASG-1 ver 1.2 does, it's hard to say until someone can hear both.

I have changed a bit of what i put.

It was mainly the bass change which is the biggest difference and similarity to the 1.2. Also after more listening it is actually the bass increase that make the treble seemingly change but it does not it is just the rest moving around it.

I will hopefully at one stage but being in the UK i can not get one on loan! :(